A group, Nigerian Democracy Defence Movement (NDDM) has condemned the court ruling authorising the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to withhold the monthly allocation to Rivers State Government.
In a statement issued by Dr. Anayo Nweke, the national coordinator, Nigerian Democracy Defence Movement (NDDM) the group contend that this judgment undermines the principles of democracy and federalism.
According to the group, by withholding the funds, the federal government is effectively crippling the state’s ability to function, causing undue hardship for citizens.
The Group stated further: “The judiciary’s intervention in the state’s financial matters sets a worrying precedent, potentially undermining the separation of powers.
“The ruling disregards the will of the people, as represented by their elected governor, and empowers a factional group within the state assembly it stated”
At the heart of the issue is the Federal High Court’s ruling that no federal funds should be released to the state until its properly formed state assembly passes a legal budget.
This decision was made after a case was brought by the Rivers State assembly group led by Martins Amaewhule, contesting Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s presentation of the 2024 budget to just five assembly members .
The group aligned with the former Vice president of Nigeria, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar who expressed concerns that Nigerians are losing confidence in the judiciary due to this ruling.
Atiku said: “The implications of this judgment extend beyond Rivers State, potentially affecting other states and the overall health of Nigeria’s democracy.”
Dr. Nweke and his group stated that the judgment concerning Rivers State on withholding federal government allocations has sparked controversy, particularly in relation to the Lagos State judgment and others.
“In 2004, the Attorney-General of Lagos State took the Attorney-General of the Federation to court over a circular letter that directed states to withhold funds allocated to local government councils from the Federation Account. The Lagos State government argued that the President had no right to withhold funds due to local government councils, citing Section 162 subsection (5) of the 1999 Constitution” they stated.
“The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Lagos State, stating that the President’s actions were unconstitutional and that the funds should be released. However, the implications of this judgment on Rivers State and other states facing similar issues remain unclear.”
Our opinion, if that this judgment is implemented, the whole state apparatus will be crippled; meaning that workers will no longer be paid, pensioners will no longer receive their pension, school teachers will no longer be paid, health workers will no longer be paid and even community vigilant workers will be out of job. All these in our opinion will create extreme problems beyond anyone’s control. So, we advise that the judgment must be jettisoned for the interest of the people.
“We are also calling on NJC to call judges to order to avoid too many conflicting judgments that are bringing the integrity of the judgment to disrepute.
“We also wonder if a judge could permit an order for any government to stop sending allocation to the judiciary; that if it cannot be done, why will the court order for such to be done to a state; notwithstanding the heavy load the state carries. “
